Came across this link, courtesy of Sean Esterline.

http://tribality.com/2015/04/22/5-ways- ... oleplayer/

I like what's said in it, and wanted to share it. The one part I'm not so sure about is point #3. I think there's a better word to be used rather than 'Heroic'. I agree with the core of the sentiment, but the word choice throws the discussion into a different perspective because 'Heroic' has certain things attached to it (something we're all too aware of in Arcanis). Maybe it might be better expressed as 'passionate'. Apathy drags a story down, while passion and engagement make a story exciting, and just because your character wouldn't necessarily be interested doesn't mean that they won't find something to be interested in along the way.

The article lines up well with many of my own sentiments and preferences. I want to game with thoughtful players, who take turns sharing the spotlight, and have a real stake in the resolution of the major campaign plot points. I enjoy gaming in a world where there is a story unfolding with a beginning middle and end.

I am less sure that my preferences are the "correct" way to game. Or that the power gamers and number crunchers have it wrong. One of the strengths of RPGs is that they appeal to different people for different reasons. Trying to get people to play the game the way "you" want to play may work or may not...if someone really does just want to kill things in game and take their stuff then you are not improving their experience by pushing them to care about the villagers. You are potentially engaging in selfish behavior by putting your wants ahead of theirs.

Ultimately I don't think everyone is compatible role playing with everyone else. One of the wonderful things about Arcanis is that it draws together a lot of "strangers" across the U.S. and Canada (and beyond!) who want more than a popcorn experience at the gaming table. I have had very very few "bad encounters" with Arcaniacs over the years.